Safe Speed Forums

I think that's what Mole was saying, but there is another photo showing a second locking mechanism which cannot come apart under that type of stress if used properly, not without the latch breaking (which clearly hasn't).

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Is it right to automatically call any misjudgement or unawareness "a level of agression"? Please could you explain that.


Which is fair enough, it may well not have been, but do you believe that speed alone automatically necessitates a loss of licence?


I've looked at this via Google aerial view, like I said, I reckon he had plenty of visibility (I reckon 100m from the hump, increasing after that). Some of those cyclists were going really slow (I reckon 8mph), so I reckon an attempt here is acceptable, of course accepting he must abort (and even stop to allow the cyclists back past) if he saw anything coming the other way.

You didn't actually answer graball's question, which I think is quite pertinent to this debate.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

At 11 years old I could reach 25 mph on my bmx (I had a speedo on mine )

I can only assume that all bicycles would be delivered with accurate speedometers and number plates to identify the rider, should they average over 20 mph. New cars are designed to absorb impact when hitting pedestrians, and we all know that pedestrians that get hit at 20 mph find the experience rather cossetting . I'd rather be hit by a modern car than a bicycle.

I find in my car, that if I accelerate as I go over speed humps, the impact is less. When accelerating the weight is shifted backward, extending the front suspension.

I thought the car was in the truck body too, but I think it just looks that way. At the end of the clip, there are the same number of cars on the street as there was before. The one bouncing up and down is the one he hooked with his door. But, will stand corrected.

As a side note, I bet if you paid him £1,000,000, he couldn't hook that parked car again and he certainly couldn't hook it and miss the front parked car.

There is a car in the truck body, a crushed up van of some sort, maybe even a camper van.

His previous victim?

Yes it was, and you're quit right, there is something in the photo. The top one looks like a big hasp that's supposed to have a padlock or staple through it. There's another one half way down that I can't quite make out, and I suspect the one(s) he was relying on are at the bottom inner corners of each door, but I can't see them. It's possible to see little rollers on the bottom of the skip, which suggests that the lorry is a flat-backed vehicle that carries lots of different skips of that basic design - could be a lack of familiarity on the driver's part with that particular skip (although that's a long shot - I doubt they vary much in design)! I wonder whether the driver thought of them as only to stop the doors bursting open if he had a big load in the back but as there was only an old "surf shack" shell in there, he felt it would be very unlikely to move and didn't bother securing the doors properly? Ironically, I bit if it HAD been fully-laden, (and I suspect that's more than the 7 tons Weepej suggests), It might not have bounced so much over the speed bump and the doors wouldn't have popped open!

Well... I'd say the scrap that was in the back of that skipper was old kitchen stuff <-- zoomed in with compiz

Looks like a stainless steel sink in that stillage not another vehicle.

As to the smokies question

1: Use of a vehicle in a dangerous manner.. ie: insecure rear doors
2: Not wearing a seat belt !!

Before moving off in a vehicle your supposed to ensure things like the rear doors opening inadvertently DON'T happen. YES vehicle bodies flex.. they have to. If the rear door lock latches don't work properly your supposed to secure the latches or handles to prevent this possibility.

_________________
The Box said "Windows XP or better" ... So I installed Ubuntu

Yes. you're quite right, it certainly does look like a collection of old scrap including a sink! I've no idea where I got the camper van notion from!

I'm not saying the guy was blameless - far from it, and I agree that it's his responsibility to ensure that his load is secure. I guess they'd get him for an "insecure load" under (I think?) Construction & Use Regulation 100. A lot of the thread was a discussion about where he was driving too fast and / or aggressively - which I don't think was the case. I doubt a vehicle like that would be fitted with seat belts to be honest.